Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Land Use Rezoning topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Planning commission backs rezoning at Stevens Avenue after neighbors raise concerns about proposed parking lot

Minneapolis Planning Commission · May 19, 2026
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

The Minneapolis Planning Commission recommended rezoning 2007 Stevens Ave from UN3 to RM1 to allow an accessory parking lot serving a fourplex at 2001 Stevens, after staff said rezoning was needed to legally locate parking; neighbors warned about safety, climate, and loss of green space. The commission adopted staff findings and will forward the rezoning recommendation to City Council.

The Minneapolis Planning Commission on May 18 recommended that the City Council rezone 2007 Stevens Avenue from UN3 to RM1 to allow an accessory off‑street parking area serving the adjoining cluster development at 2001 Stevens Avenue.

Alex Cohales, the city planner presenting the item, told the commission the owner proposes to combine the two parcels and create a six‑space off‑street parking area using an existing curb cut. Cohales said the rezoning would remove a zoning code obstacle that currently prevents an accessory parking lot on a UN3 parcel from serving a principal use in an RM1 district and that staff recommends approval with conditions.

The applicant, Joan RBC Little, said she and her husband bought the lots to preserve green space for tenants and described a fourplex at 2001 Stevens that has been in her family since 1969. "We purchased the empty lot at 2007 Stevens in 2015 to preserve the green space for the enjoyment of our tenants," Little said, explaining the modest off‑street parking is intended for tenants and to offset two on‑street spaces lost during the Franklin Avenue reconstruction.

Neighbors urged the commission to reject rezoning that would enable a new surface parking lot. Ben, who lives at 111 E. Franklin, said he reviewed staff documents and the grading plan and questioned claims about on‑site stormwater retention and the project’s climate resiliency. "I don't believe that is true," he said of the staff statement that stormwater will be retained on site. Other nearby residents said a parking lot could worsen traffic on a one‑way street, induce more vehicle trips in a dense neighborhood and remove a valued green space.

Cohales and commissioners clarified that technical engineering questions, including stormwater treatment, are addressed through a separate Preliminary Development Review by Public Works, and that the rezoning question before the commission is primarily whether the parcel's future land‑use and zoning should match the adjacent RM1 parcel along the Franklin Avenue goods‑and‑services corridor.

Several commissioners acknowledged the public concerns about surface parking but said the RM1 designation better aligns with the comprehensive plan’s future land‑use guidance for Franklin Avenue. Commissioner Magner moved to adopt staff findings; the commission approved the recommendation by roll call with seven ayes.

The commission's action is a recommendation to the City Council on the rezoning. The conditional use permit to legalize the larger lot area for the existing cluster development remains under the Planning Commission’s review and will proceed through the established quasi‑judicial processes; if the commission denies the CUP it could be appealed to council. Public Works will continue to review engineering details including stormwater and turning movements under the PDR process.

Next steps: The commission’s rezoning recommendation will appear before City Council in the coming weeks; the CUP decision and any appeals will follow the city’s procedural timelines.